Bannon Vs. Frum

The latest Munk Debate between Steve Bannon and David Frum was a snapshot of where politics are today. If you’ve never seen one I’d recommend this one. Debaters argue for and against global policy. A resolution is posed and the audience is expected to vote based on the debate they just watched. I think they host these events a couple of times per year.

The resolution this week “The future of Western Politics is Populist not Liberal” had Steve Bannon arguing for populism and David Frum arguing against. It’s probably easier to think of the difference like this, Trump equals populism and Bush (or Obama) equals liberalism. In other words “liberalism” is the global order that has defined Western civilization since World War II. Both ideologies contain adherents of right and left. Populist leaders, including Trump, have come to power around the globe in recent years, most recently in Brazil. It’s tough for anyone to draw hard lines around ideologies without recognizing differences in the countries where they originate. Would populism in Poland look different than populism in Myanmar? I think it would. Populism is really just shorthand for throw-out-the ‘ruling class’and start electing people with limited political acumen.

Steve Bannon had his hands full defending Trump and global populism in general. Bannon’s gripe (and his best argument) has always been the administrative state, a permanent fixture of our system that is unaccountable. He hates massive trade bills and open borders because they wreck sovereignty and treat the democratic process like a joke. He pretty much explained that position to the audience and got a few claps, mostly boos and heckles though. Frum argued for traditional liberalism with its respect for alliances, loose borders and international treaties. David is a smart guy; he is used to being on TV so he is very articulate and understands global trade and tariffs. This was a home crowd for him in Toronto. He took some usual shots at Trump and his lack of expertise or skill.

He obviously thinks Donald Trump is ill equipped for the job and played to the crowd who agreed with him. What he misses is that he is pretty much the embodiment of what a lot of Americans don’t like about their ‘betters’ in Washington. He is part of a professional class that typifies Steve Bannon’s administrative state--highly educated, networked in the same social circles, all thinking along the same track, all swearing allegiance to same international forums, organizations, confabs, and summits. The locus of power keeps moving further out of reach of the American people to a bureaucratic cabal.

It isn’t resentment, it’s just the truth.

 Where Steve is frumpy and passionate, David is polished and glib. Their difference personifies the positions they took.   

David took a few cheap shots at Trump supporters and their supposed racism and xenophobia, suggesting blacks were being kept from voting and that George Soros is reviled because he is Jewish. I think Frum knows this is just nasty point scoring with the audience.

   

As for me I would have voted for the resolution. I don’t like populism but I do think there is a creeping classism sneaking into the US that is foreign to the country. We’ve always had a vibrant middle class and a meritocratic system of upward mobility. Ok, it wasn’t good for African Americans until recently but hard work equaled better opportunities not better status. We don’t have an aristocracy, we’re too young. Fortunately we still do have a vibrant middle class but with a massive administrative state we lose the ability to determine our destiny. Unprotected borders damage sovereignty and suggest that the duly elected government isn’t concerned about your safety or how much money is spent on welfare schemes. If it’s true in the U.S. I imagine it’s true in Europe as well.  

I can say all of that and still think Steve Bannon is probably a nasty guy. He isn’t a racist just because he’s mean to his opponents though. He doesn’t hate Muslims because he restricted immigration from countries with internal terrorism problems. It’s also telling that the protesters who wanted to shut down the very civil debate, wanted to do so on the basis that Steve would be there.In a free country (Canada) protesters thought a pro-national sovereignty guy was beyond the pale. Is there a better example of why we need more speech and not less?

Populism of the Steve Bannon/Donald Trump variety is probably a short term trend anyway. David Frum is right to be skeptical of global populism. The danger inherent is the ‘Us versus Them’ dynamic used to throw out ‘undesirables’ whether Jews in Russia or Rohingyas in Myanmar. But the other danger is letting an unelected class of ‘professionals’ run the affairs of the state and take away all sovereignty. There is a reason the British left the European Union, the Brazilians elected Bolsonaro, and the US elected Trump. I don’t know if it constitutes populism but citizens of those countries decided the global order didn’t have their interests’ at heart.

There was a technical glitch in the voting results at the end of the night. Steve Bannon supposedly won by a good margin (57%) despite starting off the night less than 30%. The true results were close to what they had been at the beginning of the night. Winning isn’t really the point of the debates. It’s to get current ideas and issues out in the open. Free speech is wonderful thing.

Whatever side of an issue people come down on, it’s still possible to argue and agree in a free society.

Routines To the Rescue

Regular habits and healthy routines lay the groundwork for productive people; the more you have the more effective you are.

Most people have probably noticed the headlining grabbing “Successful Habits of the Rich”, or “Routines of Successful CEOs”. Usually they’re just Buzzfeed style lists with some quirky facts. Apparently Tim Cook (Apple CEO) starts texting his colleagues at 4 a.m. about projects, questions, answers. Mark Cuban tries to work out for an hour a day with basketball and kickboxing. The routines vary but one thing they have in common is they constitute a plan for individuals to map out the day. Even people who aren’t as busy will benefit from starting and ending the day with a plan.  

I have better routines now than I had in the Army, and much better than college. Although, the regular exercise and hot breakfast is hard to beat in the military. I still exercise but not every day. I run quite a bit and life weights at least 3 times per week. Going to the gym for me is better after a day of work instead of before. Mostly because of the later hours, I don’t get moving before 8 in the morning. For most people 8 o’clock is too late. But I don’t even start work until after 9. For now anyway, evening exercise is perfect. When I don’t go after work I feel like I missed something critical.

I started reading scripture every morning about 5 years ago. I need that critical jolt of truth even more than I need coffee. Without it I feel lost. Ever need your front end aligned on the car? The steering wheel starts puling in one direction and you need to correct it back to center? Usually it happens because you hit a pothole or hit a curb too hard. It’s a simple fix for a tech--put the front end on a machine and tighten or loosen the tie rods. When I don’t put in time reading the Bible I my sense of direction gets off-center and needs a reset.  

Another value from routines is in reducing the number of choices you need to make every day. Fewer choices equal less stress. I remember having a math class my 2^nd year of college. I managed to put it off for the first semester so I wasn’t looking forward to it. It was pretty basic by math standards, but I’m pretty basic by learning standards. I developed a system of doing my assigned homework right after class. My mind was still in logical left brain land so it made sense to do the work right away. It took at least an hour every day and I struggled all the way through it. But I did it. I started early and after a few weeks I didn’t have to force myself to open the text and begin figuring. I developed a habit, of doing assigned work and took the decision to sit and watch “SportsCenter” instead, out my hands. 

Routines put your mind in a kind of autopilot.

Even though regular habits seem like drudgery, they provide us with better productivity and more flexibility. I’ve gotten good at doing certain academic things early, writing and research, reading and journaling. College actually helped me with this. But other parts of life like work around the house or fixing changing the oil in the car are still put offs for me. Everyone who procrastinates understands the problems with it. Projects get the half-assed treatment and sometimes get missed altogether. With some simple changes in routine, procrastination will cease to be a stumbling block.

Routines make every other decision in life easier.   

Economist Magazine

I am having trouble getting my regular issue of the Economist magazine delivered on time. Meaning the freaking post office can’t seem to get it to my door on Monday like they used to. It seems a little silly to complain about a physical magazine in the internet age. I could just as easily pay to read the website instead and get a cheaper rate. The reason I haven’t done it yet is having the physical copy makes it more likely I’ll read it. By paying for an internet subscription I’ll forget to open the site. When was the last time you ignored hand written letter delivered to your door? Probably never, but I delete emails all the time without even reading. Staring at the copy is a reminder, "Hey, you're paying for this so be sure and do the work".

Why is it important? Some traditions just stay with us for a while, they tether us to a sense of normalcy. It’s like sleeping in your own bed after a week of vacation. It resets your mind. It helps get your routine back, ease into life again.  Even staying in a posh hotel with thick sheets and soft comforters can’t compare.  

My tradition with the weekly magazine goes back to my first year in Oklahoma. I was about to start an International Studies program at Oklahoma State University (Go Pokes!). The advice I got, don’t remember who from, was to subscribe and read every article every time. Supposedly their reporters cover more territory than anyone (other than BBC) and the breadth of subject matter is unrivaled. I think that’s basically true, although I don’t know of any comparisons. The habit of weekly reading stuck even though it was a tough couple of years trying to figure out some of the economic concepts, government terms. The dense language taught me to focus better, understand more, translate ideas into real world events, see connections between money and politics or politics and business. There is no question it helped with retention, concepts.

The editors take a practical stance on markets and a weak view on national movements. They are sometimes painfully globalist and seem confused why any country would want to protect their industries. They think most tradition is silly and believe that whatever advances the economic interests of the country should be considered in policy making.

I decided a while ago not to get hung up on the politics. Every newspaper and media outlet has a bias. Sometimes it shows through like red dye on a white t-shirt. Occasionally it crosses a line between reporting and promoting causes, parities, legislation. The Economist is broadly liberal and although they don’t value tradition, I agree with their basic framework for international trade. Keep tariffs low, encourage innovation through tax breaks, privatize government services where possible. I am looking at you USPS.  

I still think of flipping the pages as homework. Everyone needs to have some learning in their life after school, mine is writing and economics. New learning has to be a natural fit though. I wouldn’t want to learn how to rebuild cars or write software. Those disciplines don’t interest me so I don’t bother. But without some hobby or interest beyond just watching TV after work, our minds suffer. I hope this doesn’t come off as pretentious or smug, just because something is interesting to me doesn’t mean it is interesting to everyone.

 The larger point is to learn outside the classroom and force your mind to work a little bit. Who knows, maybe you’ll find a fit you never expected and discover how to make money new ways. Or maybe you’ll learn a new skill and find friends in that field. Maybe you’ll invent a new process, or system that makes doing what you do easier, cheaper.

I would love the US Postal service to figure out a process for efficient mail delivery. Let’s start there.

Baseball's Attendance Problem

Baseball attendance at big league parks was down this year across the country. This is getting to be a regular thing. Ticket sales cost clubs between a third to a fifth of their yearly revenue. The article I read didn’t specify what the largest revenue generator was, but we can imagine broadcast rights are probably the big winner. But everything from concessions to parking to merchandising goes into the mix for most teams. As to why people aren’t going to games anymore, we’re getting kinda lazy.  

 Actually going to the game can be a hassle for a lot of people. Depending on where you live, just getting to the ball park can be an all day ordeal a lot of people would rather not deal with. If you drove, the parking ticket will come with a hefty fee as will the food and beer you consume while there. If you get bad seats you’ll struggle to follow the game and instead end up watching the screen for replays. Watching at home provides the best angles for unfolding plays, up close zooms, replays. Recording allows you to grab a snack, use the bathroom and check laundry. The sharpness of the cameras gets better every few years, as does the amount of cameras on the field. If you’re looking to watch a game, there really isn’t a better option than TV.

The stay at home trend isn’t just popular in baseball either. I passed by a sign for Outback Steakhouse today that advertised delivery. Uber added a delivery service (Uber Eats) for food as well. Just call up your favorite restaurant and send a driver around to get it for you. Consumers do this with groceries as well. It shouldn’t be a stretch to assume, some people are much more comfortable at home.

That only accounts for a portion of the people though. Some like the atmosphere of the stadium and roar of the crowd after a home run. Watching live sports doesn’t guarantee the best viewing. It does promise an experience you won’t get hanging out at home. Anytime I went to a Cubs game I took the opportunity to spend the day in Chicago shopping and eating. The rule of thumb is that getting out of the city right after a game is the worst time to leave, St. Louis is much better. For those that live in Chicago the train (elevated train) stops right at the park. I rarely got great seats and the food was expensive, but nothing beats hearing 40,000 fans roaring after a home run.

 People aren’t as interested in baseball anymore. The ratings prove we don’t watch in nearly the same numbers as we used to. World Series TV numbers have mostly shown decline over the last decade, with the Cubs getting a ratings bump in 2016.  The largest group of baseball fans (half) are 55 or older. This is a problem long term. Every sport needs to ensure that it has enough replacement fans down the road. Most kids think baseball is too slow though. Who can blame them, compared to most other sports it is.

Purists’ think the lack of a clock is the best part of the game. You play until the outs are recorded and not before nine innings, as long as someone is leading after nine. Major League Baseball put in some replay cameras to overrule bad calls by the umpires. There are limits on how often managers can insist on going to the replays, just like the NFL, but it does increase the overall time. By putting in cameras and replays, they hope to cut down on human error and give managers more options to override accidental calls. It’s also an attempt to update the game a little. MLB is by far the most resistant to change of any of the top sports leagues. Being the last to put in technology and update rules isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but in the marketplace it can also be costly when trying to bring on additional fans. 

I’m not convinced that changing rules and speeding up the game ever so slightly will cause droves of new fans to start watching. If baseball isn’t a game for the modern day, no amount of tweaks and rule changes are going help. Baseball execs are going to have to figure out how to appeal to the largest number of fans.

They will always be a market for professional baseball on some level. It might look different in 20 years. Some cities that maintain ball clubs do so at a loss; both Florida teams struggle to bring people to the stadium. Maybe the best way forward is to cut a handful of teams that drag everyone else down. I am looking at you Tampa Bay. Since teams share revenues, fewer games means more money for the existing clubs and better overall competition.

The truth is that most clubs don’t need huge numbers of fans to go to the games. Of course they would rather sell both tickets to the park and cable packages but they make more money from content (TV, internet) deals by far. Going to at least a couple games a year can turn someone into a fan for life though. Despite the hassles of parking, traffic, expensive food, obnoxious fans and bad weather, it is so worth it. Even if you get to see the game better from home, go at least once.     

Kavanaugh Circus

I watched the Kavanaugh hearing today.

 I imagined I’d be huddled over my phone trying to get a national radio program to stream since nearly every station was covering it. I was prepared to turn the TV to ESPN the way I do every day at work, and slink into my office to follow the Q&A from the Senate Judicial Committee. My boss told me early on to put the hearing up on the main TV so he could keep track. “Fantastic!” I thought. I get to see it at work and my boss isn’t going to care since he is interested too. So most of it I caught on the screen at work and some of it I caught listening to my phone while in my office. Here are some takeaways for me:

First, the idea that we can determine who is “believable” and who isn’t is a nonsensical idea. Statistics show that people can’t correctly judge guilt or innocence based on our feelings of a person’s character, demeanor, expression or tone. Most of us develop an opinion after watching a performance, it’s like we “must” develop a judgement. Ever watch those real life murder 'whodunnits' on NBC. They play out a disappearance or a murder and present both sides without revealing the verdict at the end? How often do you guess right?   

From what I saw they both seemed believable. That’s a problem because someone is lying.

 Opinion makers and talking heads seem to think it’s possible to believe both parties. That there is no contradiction between Ford’s “positive” ID of the Judge and of the Judge’s denial of the whole affair, is too much for me. I understand the need to be careful about calling either one a liar but one of them is doing it. They say Ford might be remembering someone else who tried to assault her. I doubt it. I think it was either him or she is lying. 

Of course none of us knows what happened but I lean toward believing Kavanaugh because the "witnesses" who were supposedly at the party denied being there. Also, the timing of this whole nasty affair is suspect. Just a few days before the committee was supposed to vote, the Democrats drop this letter on everyone. Feinstein’s office had the letter, written by Ford, for like two months. If  credible allegation of sexual assault pops up about a judge about to be on the Supreme Court, you act on it. She waited, suggesting the Democrats were hoping to spike the nomination a different way. When it didn't work, they went nuclear.

The details are impossible to know, no one confirms Ford's side of the story and a slew of “remembered” incidents suddenly appear in the news after it looks like she might not testify. You know, the slimy gang rape stuff. At least some part of this thing is cooked up by ‘outside’ groups desperate to keep a conservative off the court. I won’t say the entire testimony is a lie, she did seem sincere and I know she didn’t want to do this in front of the Senate, hoping for confidentiality.

The prosecutor who asked questions of Mrs. Ford tried to show possible influence from an outside group by asking who paid the polygraph fees. It wasn’t effective and I don’t know why the Republicans agreed to it.

Here is why Kavanaugh must be confirmed. It can't be this easy to hurl accusations and drag someone’s name through the mud just to squelch an appointment. You must provide evidence under our legal system. If this witch hunt succeeds it gives license for both Republicans and Democrats to rake each other’s candidates over the coals for sport. I’m convinced the only reason it’s been 30 years since the last one of these circus hearings (Clarence Thomas) is because it wasn’t successful. Despite a ruined reputation Thomas was confirmed. 

How can a 36 year old allegation with no witnesses, no date and no place be the basis for any investigation?  For all the hand wringing from the Democrats about the lack of an FBI investigation, what do they expect the bureau to investigate? This was a stall tactic all along. Lindsey Graham said it best in one of his finer moments, drag out the hearing until after the election and hopefully pick up enough seats to vote the judge down.

The last question of Kavanaugh, from Kennedy (LA), was the most appropriate of the entire hearing. He asked the judge if he believed in God, and if so this was his chance to tell it before “God and country”. It’s appropriate because it’s a reminder that God is the ultimate judge of our souls. 

It could be that Kavanaugh is a calculating liar that doesn’t believe in God anyway. It could also be that Christine Blasey Ford created the whole story with help from groups to create just enough doubt to force Trump to pull the nomination.Only God knows.

Still a "Toys R Us" Kid

 I think most of us have a favorite store or restaurant we remember from childhood. Places we can map out from memory because our recollection is so vivid. For me it was Toys “R” Us, that famous franchise that went out of business earlier this year. 

Toys “R” Us was basically a third world arms bazaar for boys in the kindergarten to 4^th grade range. Sketchy salesman offering help as we gawked at the shelves stocked with the latest violent toys. “See anything you like?” they’d inquire. They had the best toy weapons, cowboy revolvers with ammo belts, automatic rifles, belt-fed troop guns, grenades, Rambo survival knives and handguns. Mercenaries could really stock up. At least that’s what I liked it.

We always got a warning speech from my mom in the parking lot before entering the toy mecca. She lined us up outside the store, with pointed finger and stern tones she blasted us with that mantra we knew so well.

 “If you touch anything on the shelves that’s an automatic spanking when we get home!” It wasn’t shouted so much as jabbed, with the help of the index finger, into our souls.

 It mostly worked, but common. Have you seen the glory that is a toy store through the eyes of an 8 year old boy? An entire building dedicated to the pursuit of happiness, aisle after aisle of joy wrapped in plastic. Shelves strategically arranged to capture the attention of children who’ve wandered away from their families in a daze.  Every action figure, bouncy ball, battery jeep, dinosaur set, race track, stuffed bear, machine gun and video game demanding attention. It’s war out there. Hence the pre-game talk my mom felt the need to deliver, expecting the troops to wander off along the way. 

My parents must have known the onslaught coming their way once the automatic doors pulled back and the displays came into view. 

The Cherry Valley Toys “R” Us was a free standing building away from everything but a few car lots, a Baker’s Square, and later a go cart track. This was 30 years ago so I am sure the area has changed quite a lot. Nothing could top the anticipation though of walking into the store, grabbing a shopping cart and marveling at the sheer amount of toys. I remember a long walk behind a cart wall when you came in and a slow turn before you entered the main floor. 

Stepping onto the main floor was like having everyone shout “Surprise!” before balloons and confetti fell from the sky. It was better than that even. I’d been here before. I expected the surprise. I knew right when the hanging car displays would come into sight and the giant ball stacks would became visible. I remember which section contained the guns and which one the video games. I remember where the bikes and battery cars just big enough for kids to ride 2 across were kept.

At some point video games took over larger chunks of the store. Always kept behind glass cases, they weren’t as memorable. We bought games as we got older. We had Nintendo, Super Nintendo and I guess 64. I was done with games after the Super. I just wasn’t a gamer.

I went to a Toys “R” Us a few years ago to buy a gift for my niece. It wasn’t the one I grew up with so my opinion might have been a little skewed. I reminded me of watching a movie I loved as a kid only to find out how bad it was when I became an adult. The shelves were a mess, the floors littered with scattered stuffed animals and bouncy balls. The ceilings were low, the lighting was bad, the employees were indifferent, the prices high. I can chalk up some of this to the season; it was Christmas shopping time after all. Some I can blame on the difference between being a kid and being an adult. Oddly it was the low ceilings that disappointed me the most. In my kid brain the place was so grand and stuffed with toys in every imaginable spot, practically bursting like a Thanksgiving turkey. I remember trying to work out how long it would take me to play with every toy there, my brain nearly seizing up from the infinite possibilities.  

But now here was this sad, small structure in need of repair and desperate for joy. What happened to my Shangri-La? When did the circus leave town? Was it ever really that great? The great toy destination had become a dumpy rental in a neighborhood with more graffiti on the buildings than original paint.

The whole spectacle was sad. Not because a grown man expected a toy store to be a happy place 30 years after he stopped playing with G.I. Joe. But because the idea that a single flagship store can house nothing but toys seems unlikely anymore. Walmart, Target, Amazon and other companies have gobbled up much of the toy business that it isn’t profitable to build anymore. Even the famed F.A.O Schwarz store (in Manhattan) where Tom Hanks did the piano dance in the movie BIG closed up two years ago. 

My criticism of their neglected storefronts notwithstanding, it isn’t hard to see what happened to the business. Bigger stores with more offerings made it impossible to compete; same as grocery, electronics and nearly every type of brick and mortar place. Toys took an extra beating from a consumer culture with a lot of electronic options. Toys across the country aren’t selling well anymore and smartphones are getting blamed.

Toys “R” Us went out of business earlier this year and even though they had been overtaken by Walmart in sales, it still limits the number of places for kids. They got into debt and just never recovered. I still think a massive store dedicated to toys can work again. It needs to have full on displays where kids and grab and test though. It must be a destination store, not a bargain place where people look for deals. I don’t know if it makes economic sense anymore but I imagine with the right plan it could really take off. There are a lot of young kids out who need a place like that to remember. It could be there happy place, even if their moms won’t let them grab stuff off the shelf.   

Demon Hunter pulled me back in

I thought I outgrew it my heavy metal phase. I assumed, like action figures and baseball cards, it didn't appeal anymore--a passing interest from an earlier time. But some preset antenna in my brain clicked on this year and started receiving again.  

This summer I rediscovered metal. 

 I work in my yard a lot, perfect for mindless head banging tunes through earbuds on a hot day. I’m a Pandora guy so a lot of the suggested stuff that’s shuffled through is a mystery. Every once in a while a perfectly aggressive sound punctures the little film covering the ear piece and wakes me up. How many times has that sound been that of Demon Hunter? I can’t tell, but a pattern emerged after some time. All the good stuff is Demon Hunter.

Not content to just wait until the next mowing day, I got online and start searching for DH songs. I like to know what fans like, what are their best songs? Also, I suddenly wanted news about the group, tour dates and concert information and new song stuff. Google has lists for everything so I just start sampling their stuff. The internet is great. Remember borrowing CDs from friends or going to Best Buy for the new releases? No one misses those days. I discovered I have a bit of an obsessive side. I study things intensely for a short time and then never again. It’s ideal for research and writing though. Yesterday’s obsession was Demon Hunter, Tomorrow--maybe history’s great conspiracies or the best types of wood varnish for deck boards. Who knows?

I found this Demon Hunter live documentary called 45 days. First thing I noticed is the clean sound. This is a live show and the audio is surprisingly crisp. Video recordings rarely get full sound from a show; it's usually poor quality. It seems like one microphone was used, with uneven sound and muddy verses. 45 days is a quality film even if the cameras aren’t always in the perfect spot.

I assume when shooting a band you need to know the music and the timing of the chorus or when the lead singer is going to hit the low verses, high notes. If he is going to put his foot on the amplifier and lean menacingly into the crowd, filmmakers should want the best shot.  I could be wrong here. Maybe there is a standard format for shooting concerts that includes the crowd reaction and a full stage pyro demonstration.

For me, Demon Hunter songs break into 2 basic categories; Fast/aggressive and melodic/ballads. These are my terms and I am sure fans might see it differently. I guess they have a handful of slow, non-metal songs like “I am a Stone” but they mostly stay within the metalcore genre. I’m not an expert on the albums since I just listen to the songs as they pop up. I enjoy the fast stuff like on “Storm the Gates of Hell” and “Someone to Hate”. The drum pacing is very quick, the guitars sound like machine gun fire and the singing is aggressive. That’s pretty much a winning formula, fast drums, machine gun riffs and an intense singer.  There is almost no break between the verse and chorus, they intend to crunch as much thrash into a 5 minute song by quickening the pace.

 Regular ballads are emotional songs about loss (usually) heartbreak, sadness. “Godforsaken” is a little bit like this. I always think it’s a little jarring to go from sped up, yelling to slow and melodic but metal bands do it all the time. It feels weird at shows too. Groups usually come out with a neck snapping, energy laced throw down and 3 songs later slow it down to a crawl. It works though. We pull out the lighter and hum along with the band, swaying to the chorus and ‘feeling’ the lyrics. We clap enthusiastically with their heartfelt display of sensitivity. The very next song we ramp up and slam into each other, propelled by the crushing drums and beefy amplifiers.

Demon Hunter is a Christian band. A Christian Metal band is an interesting thing. I think most people don’t know what to make of it. Heavy Metal is known for occult symbolism, dark themes, death, anger and pain. The artwork covers are pretty honest, blood, skulls, death, violence. Christian music is the opposite of those things, light to darkness and truth to lies. Christians face a steep climb to respectability within metal. They struggle with being perceived as ‘soft’ or ‘talent-less’. When the music is good and group puts on a show, it doesn’t matter to the fans.

Demon Hunter doesn’t run from the label, they actually embrace it.

 “From the minute we started saying that [We are a Christian Band] we started getting more respect even from those other bands” video.

By ‘respect’ he doesn’t mean they embraced his theology. He means, once they decided to ‘live for Christ’ it cleared up a lot of misconceptions among fans. They started to explain their faith and share with others. Their music isn’t preachy so their lives have to be. Staying on message is important to them and I'm glad they understand the significance of what they do.

Summer’s almost over for me so I’ll have to find time to slam around the house and pretend I’m on stage. Is that something we are supposed to grow out of too? I assumed I was done with heavy music altogether, but you can’t be too sure.

Like Michael Corleone from the Godfather III, “Just when I thought I was out. . . they pull me back in!”